Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Release Date Announced

Croakyvoice writes "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J.K. Rowling, the seventh and final book in the best-selling series, has been scheduled for release at 12:01 a.m. on July 21, 2007, Scholastic announced today." A deluxe edition for collectors and enthusiasts is also planned with a simultaneous release.

Comments

Sci Fi

[germansausage]

Taggers are on crack. Again. Scifi. WTF?

Re:Sci Fi

[bennomatic]

Didn't Clarke say something along the lines of, "Any science, sufficiently advanced, is indistinguishable from magic."? The it's Ma-Fi (magic fiction, but maybe someone thought the reverse was true, and that this magic was indistinguishable from science.

Re:Sci Fi

[1u3hr]

And WTF is the idea of linking to a random gaming forum for this "news"?

The publisher's press release is here. Why does Slashdot indulge people who cut and paste from a primary source to their lousy site/blog/forum/Piquepaille to get clicks? Aside from the clicks, it often gets distorted and cut to the submitter's agenda, or just cluelessness.

Re:Sci Fi

[camperdave]

Scifi. WTF?

I heartily agree. It's SF folks, not sci-fi.

Re:Sci Fi

[1u3hr]

I heartily agree. It's SF folks, not sci-fi.

Harry Potter is neither. That's fantasy.

Re:Sci Fi

[jmorris42]

> And WTF is the idea of linking to a random gaming forum for this "news"?

Can I get an AMEN?

It needs to be a rule that only primary sources get linked. That means a blog can't be linked unless the primary content of interest to the /. crowd is the actual creative output of the blogger and not some asshole's opinion about a link to a primary source. Commentary from random assholes is what SLASHDOT is for. Lets not get all circular with slashdot posting a link to a forum talking about a blog post that said something interesting about a piece on a newspaper's website about a piece of proposed legislation on some congressman's website. The potential for a huge circlejerk here is massive.

Besides, when the article links to a site with comment posting discussion should be taking place on that site, not slash. So Hey, Taco! Why the hell do you want to drive those valuable comments (pageviews) to another site? Huh?

Re:Sci Fi

[Mateito]

Harry Potter is neither. That's fantasy.

No. Daniel Radcliffe with his shirt off is fantasy.

Re:Sci Fi

[plankrwf]

Oh dear, another Slashdotter who doesn't know his literature. A true Slashdotter, believing everything he (or she???) reads at slashdot, would immediately know that in a recent slashdot article (http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/ 01/2049239) an article was mentioned (http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id= 116&art_id=qw1170340561317B216) in which this quote was made:
"It is a machine mechanism that is going to take molecular machines a step forward to the realisation of the future world of nanotechnology. Things that seem like a Harry Potter film now are going to be a reality."
So, obviously the tagging of thís story as "SciFi" is indeed wrong, as it should by "SciFu" (Science Future) ;-0
(Yes, this is a joke, pun intended!)

Re:Sci Fi

[UnanimousCoward]

Forget that link. This one's better :-)

http://www.equustheplay.com/pr/index.php

Re:Sci Fi

[powerlord]

Actually ... the best "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" books I've read recenetly is the Council Wars series by John Ringo.

Any series whose first book ("There Will Be Dragons") starts with a future earth where teleportation, nanotech, true A.I., and personal force fields exist, and ends with the fall of civilization, orcs, and the forshadowing of dark elves is rather neat in my book. :)

Re:Sci Fi

[fahrbot-bot]

Didn't Clarke say something along the lines of, "Any science, sufficiently advanced, is indistinguishable from magic."?

You misspelled "Perl" ...

Re:Sci Fi

[Mr. Slippery]

Harry Potter is neither. That's fantasy.

Depends on whether yo expand "SF" to "speculative fiction" or to "science fiction".

Re:Sci Fi

[1u3hr]

Depends on whether yo expand "SF" to "speculative fiction" or to "science fiction".

But you can't expand "sci fi" to "speculative fiction".

What's wrong with using the word "fantasy" for stories about wizards and dragons?

Re:Sci Fi

[Mr. Slippery]

But you can't expand "sci fi" to "speculative fiction".

No, but that's not the question. The statement "Harry Potter is neither SF nor sci fi" depends on what SF stands for. If "SF" stands for "speculative fiction", as some argue it should, the statement is incorrect. Harry Potter is speculative fiction - fiction occuring in a setting that is not our world, fiction that asks "what if..." not just about characters and plot but about the setting, about the universe.

What's wrong with using the word "fantasy" for stories about wizards and dragons?

Nothing. But that doesn't answer the broader questions of categorization. Is "fantasy" another word for "swords and sorcery", or it another word for "speculative fiction"? In the later defintion, science fiction, swords and sorcery, supernatural horror, superhero stories, Twilight Zone-type oddities, all are types of "fantasy".

Re:Sci Fi

[1u3hr]

I know that the terms are fuzzy and mean different things to different people. "Speculative fiction" is a useful umbrella term, it's unfortunate it has the same initials as Science Fiction. To me, SF means Science Fiction, quite distinct from Fantasy. Sci-Fi has the connotastion of media tie-ins, stuff like Star Wars; that mix fantasy elements with no concern for science, or often internal consistency. If you just use all the terms interchangeably, what's the point?

Regardless of the release date

[Tebriel]

I'm sure someone will have posted spoilers to the internet months in advance, and if you care about Harry Potter, you'll have inadvertently stumbled upon them and cursed loudly.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it really matter if people post spoilers?

When the last book came out and people posted about Dumbledore being dead it didn't detract much from the story, in fact, it was the most interesting part of all the books released because of the dialogue between Snape and Dumbledore. After six years we STILL don't know if Snape's good or bad. People couldn't even decide if Dumbledore was actually dead until JK decided to say he was.

The writing of that chapter was pure genius perhaps BECAUSE of the spoiler.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[SoulDrift]

Dumbledore dies?!

You insensitive clod!!

Re:Regardless of the release date

[porcupine8]

I've honestly never seen an honest-to-god HP spoiler. Where do you find them? There's always tons of speculation, but the only real info is whatever JKR releases on her site - which is rarely to never anything really useful. There were some supposed "spoilers" of Dumbledore's death, but there were just as many sites saying it was going to be Hagrid (or one of several other characters).

Re:Regardless of the release date

[Hes Nikke]

Dumbledore is not dead. He just can't be! *runs and cries*

Re:Regardless of the release date

[Rebelgecko]

Warning: Spoiler alert!

Re:Regardless of the release date

[IdolizingStewie]

Somebody here had it in their sig about a week before the book came out. He's lucky this guy never perfected his invention.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[bladesjester]

So's the guy who played him.

I know the guy was a method actor, but dang, that's just taking it a little too far...

Re:Regardless of the release date

[Mr. Flibble]

I've honestly never seen an honest-to-god HP spoiler. Where do you find them?

I unfortunately found mine in some insensitive clod's slashdot comment where he mentioned that Dumbledore died...

But seriously, that was how I unfortunately found out, some clod had that factoid in their sig. Really ruined the last book for me.

This time I avoid the intarwebs and buy the book within the first few days.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[5c11]

There were some supposed "spoilers" of Dumbledore's death

Yeah, like that one right there. Some of us are still a couple books behind, you insensitive clod.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[focitrixilous P]

Hey, Snape Kills Dumbledore!

Re:Regardless of the release date

[75th Trombone]

You can't trust ANYWHERE on the internet anytime within, say, a month of the book's release to be spoiler-free. I found mine at RMS's website of all places about a week before the book came out. He was on a mostly irrational rant, as usual, about people's freedoms being violated, and in the process he just blatantly stated who killed who on what page, proving once and for all that he does not really care about people, only his own ideas.

Ahem.

So yeah. They were out there last time, and they will be again this time. The only safe place on the internet is probably the Mugglenet homepage, and that's assuming Emerson doesn't get his server hacked.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[mrchaotica]

Unfortunately, his timing was horrible!

Re:Regardless of the release date

[geminidomino]

Snape shot first!

Re:Regardless of the release date

[LadyNik0n]

there was a snapekilledumpledore.com site or something about 2 weeks after the release of the book. It has a scanned page of the book with the section of his death highlighted.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[poopdeville]

Yeah. Michael Gambon is doing is really shitty job as Dumbledore. Richard Harris was soft spoken and gentle, like Rowling described in the books. Gambon acts like he's never heard the phrase "speak softly and carry a big stick."

Re:Regardless of the release date

[Minwee]

So you probably don't want to hear about the chapter where Harry and Malfoy wind up naked in the hot tub talking about whether they like to eat oysters or snails.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[phoenixwade]

I read it before the Authors cut came out, Dumbledor shot first!

Re:Regardless of the release date

[MM_LONEWOLF]

Personally, I'm just waiting for a book warehouse employee to steal a copy, scan it into his computer, and sell it online for 2 bucks a pop. I guarantee someone will be sued for doing something similiar to this.

Re:Regardless of the release date

[Corpuscavernosa]

Dumbledore died? Fuck.

Live Blogging from B&N

[thesupermikey]

Just letting people know i started camping out in front of my local Barnes and Noble This afternoon. If anyone could bring me some coffee, that would be super-sweet.

Im going to get back to writing my erotic fan fiction where Hairy and lee adama from Battlestar Galactica become close friends (wink wink)

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[TrippTDF]

Lee isn't Harry's type!

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[bennomatic]

Dude, there's a Starbucks in every B&N. Can't you get your coffee there?

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[Firehed]

Oh that's just so wrong. I bet he'd go for Starbuck though. Actually, probably Boomer, seeing that he had a thing for Asians :)

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[The Bungi]

where Hairy and lee adama

Slip of the keyboard there?

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[idtawra]

So he's a /.'r?

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[Firehed]

Hm, 50% Insightful? I love my karma as much as the next guy, but I think some moderator is taking these slightly-perverted erotic fanfic ideas a little too seriously. But, whatever, I can't complain.

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[Merusdraconis]

Yeah! He's my type!

Get lost, you fangirls!

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[thesuperbigfrog]

Why wait for the book when you can have the book come to you: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0545010225/ref=am b_link_4077732_1/102-0255563-1302538

Re:Live Blogging from B&N

[complete loony]

"... I can't complain" You must be new here.

So...

[Hsensei]

wonder when the "Harry dies on page..." shirts come out?

So does this mean

[jlechem]

I can finally kick my habit of dirty nasty but delicious harry on ron on hermoine on snape fanfics and get into some real book reading?

Harry Potter's Deathly Hallows breakfast cereal

[j00r0m4nc3r]

I can't wait to eat a bowl of Deathly Hallows. I might even mix in some C3POs if I'm feeling saucy.

Re:Harry Potter's Deathly Hallows breakfast cereal

[Gogogoch]

You'll never see this because JKR has taken a stand against using her work to promote junk food and crap like that. That's why there's been no HP toys with Happy Meals etc. Hmmm... I suppose HP adorning a box all All Bran might happen :-)

Re:Harry Potter's Deathly Hallows breakfast cereal

[jd]

Then Azhkaban could be used to promote Hovis brread - after all, there's nowt taken out.

Spoilers

[sokoban]

Harry kills Voldemort on page 608!

Nooooooooooooooooo. You bitch.

Re:Spoilers

[taustin]

Page 608? I would think she'd wait until the last half of the book, at least.

Re:Spoilers

[hey!]

Her publishers told her she has to cut the number of pages down. So the book is coming out in "royal folio" format (20 x 12½ inches).

Re:Spoilers

[grnbrg]

Harry kills Voldemort on page 608!

What, again?

Maybe he'll stay dead this time....

grnbrg.

Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[Kadin2048]

I'm sure the T-shirt printers are getting ready: "Harry Potter dies on page 573, I just saved you 15 hours and $29."

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure the T-shirt printers are getting ready: "Harry Potter dies on page 573, I just saved you 15 hours and $29."

It's going to be hilarious when you're torn limb from limb by a horde of enraged 12 year old girls.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[stanmann]

I expect to purchase the book before 0100 the day it goes on sale, to get a couple hours sleep, and finish the book by noon.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[DarkAxi0m]

It's going to be hilarious when you're torn limb from limb by a horde of enraged 12 year old girls. ..>mmmm i had a dream like that once :S

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[miyako]

Actually, it's the last book because since the beginning of the series, she planned on making 1 book for each of the seven years at Hogwarts.
I don't think that it's fair to criticize the fans of the series. There are certainly people who are fans of the series who are young, or who are older and not well read, but there are also many people who are well read and can appreciate the stories.
As for the comments regarding the plotlines being predictable, the series does make use of a number of themes that are common to the fantasy genre, and certainly in retrospect it is easy to see how the plot has followed those common themes. I think this applies especially to the large thematic arches of the series. There are, however, surprising and interesting subplots that can be enjoyed.
The thing is though, even these subplots are not exceptionally intricate, and I do not think that the series is meant to be read like a standard mystery or thriller, where you spend the book trying to figure out who done it, where, how and why. The series isn't really about telling a new story and trying to figure that story out. I think that the real strength of the series is it's implementation of common fantasy themes. To use the cliche`, it's about the journey, not the destination. Reading the Harry Potter series is about seeing how these traditional events unfold in a certain time and place. The author understand that, and focuses on those elements of the story- creating a vibrant living world with three-dimensional characters and exploring how these recurring themes effect them and the world they live in.
It is perfectly fair to not like the series, but don't completely dismiss it or the people who enjoy it.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[rucs_hack]

A reasoned response with well thought out arguments? On Slashdot?

Dude, I mean really, that's just not the way its supposed to happen....

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[David Horn]

With the greatest possible respect, you Sir, are a moron. The vast majority of people find Harry Potter an enjoyable read - primarily because they're not approaching it expecting War and Peace and looking to criticise. Bear in mind that it's got millions of kids reading, and for that alone the Harry Potter series is priceless and JK Rowling deserves to be applauded.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[trenien]

'Vibrant living world'?

'Three-dimensional characters'?

Dude, you've got to tell us what you've been smoking when you were reading these books.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[Gabrill]

That's why it's fantasy and not sci-fi!!!!!

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[Flyboy Connor]

When I was a kid, I read everything I could get my hands on. I even read my mother's old pockte books. The ones about girls at boarding school. For kids, you know, not what the average adult male thinks books about girls at boarding school are. I am virtually certain Mrs. Rowling read these books too. And I can tell you now: Harry Potter is the modern variant of the girls-at-boarding-school books, with some cliche fantasy thrown in for good measure. It is almost nostalghia when I read them.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[superiority]

Oh, they're not that bad. Although it's easy to see why she was initially rejected by so many publishers, I reckon the first three are decent children's fare (peaking with the third), but I agree there's nothing really substantive there.

Then she got famous, and apparently decided she didn't need an editor anymore. Stephen King-itis, I've heard it called.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[cHALiTO]

It's not shitty any more than any other easy-read, fantasy novel. They're not all Tolkiens or Ecos, you know. And that doesn't make a book BAD (or good either).
Sales don't mean shit. HP sells like mad, and though it's certainly not shakespeare, it's quite enjoyable as a light, fun fantasy series. On the other hand, the Da Vinci Code also sells like hotcakes, and it's one of the biggest and smelliest piles of shit I've read in a long time.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[bkr1_2k]

Any novel that is written for modern comsumption is completely predictable. Who cares? What makes a novel is either the people or the setting, because let's face it, plots have all been done before. This is the same story told in a different way, just like every other book you read.

Mediocre writing, maybe, but debatable. Great plot, no. Good character development, possibly, depending on the character. A lot of them are two dimensional stereotypes, but the core "good guys" have taken on some depth over the last few books.

The real point that makes these books important is the simple fact that so many people are reading them. Whether you think they're crap or not, it's bringing a lot of people into a new era of reading, if you will. Sure some people will continue to read mediocre stuff, but many (in the hundreds of thousands most likely) will start to read other things. Things with a different depth, things with a different genre.

As for Douglas Adams, yeah he was funny, but the books weren't that memorable. I've read both Harry Potter and four of the Douglas Adams books to my children and we all generally liked them both, but I remember the characters from Harry Potter far more than the characters from Hitchhiker.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[rucs_hack]

Actually my favorite Douglas Adams books aren't the Hitch-hiker ones. For that story I prefer the padio play, which I listened to when it was first out.

The Dirk Gently series, and Last Chance to see are my favorites.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[MM_LONEWOLF]

Sir, while I may not have a vocabulary that can rival your own, I believe that I have reading skills at least comparable to your own. I am a student with a college-graduate reading level since the 5th grade, yet I still enjoy this series. Why? Well, like a very few amount of others, such as the "Alice" series, I believe that Mrs. Rowling manages to make real personalities for her characters. Emotions, reactions, and even their own actions all seem genuine and real, as opposed to characters that have seemed forced from other writers. This is why millions of adults AND children read her books.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[FuzzyDaddy]

you are justifying reading the childish dribble to yourself

"Just because you have the emotional depth of a teaspoon, Ron, doesn't mean that everyone does"

-Hermione

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[strider44]

True about the Da Vinci code. I would like to mention though the interesting comparison between JK Rowling and JRR Tolkien. It's pretty clear that JRR Tolkien is master worldbuilder, but the difference is sort of redundant. The main thing that sets JK Rowling apart is that she is a master of story telling. Harry Potter is simply a bloody good yarn - very well planned and very well told. The characters are complex with subtle habits and realistic traits. Dumbledore's habit of always referring to people by their first names rather than family names which seems to be the norm in the wizarding world is a good example of this, highlighting his indifference of family and blood where he believes it doesn't matter who's belly you came out of but rather the person you are. JRR Tolkien on the other hand was never a brilliant narrator, just a damned good one. You would get lost in his world, but not so much his story.

Just my thoughts.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[Thraxen]

Whatever... your argument has little merit. The Potter books have managed to stay high the in the best seller lists long after they hype of their release has passed. This book is already topping sales charts via pre-orders and the hype hasn't even really started... just the release date announcement. You could put them in "an out of the way part of the shop" and they will still sell. If you don't like it, fine, but they are still enjoyable books for most people. And as someone else mentioned, the fact that they have gotten many kids to actually read should not be overlooked. Certainly being forced to read the so-called "classics" in school never worked as well.

Re:Cue spoiler t-shirts.

[gknoy]

I agree. I find the Harry Potter books to be very enjoyable to read (even if I haven't re-read them ;)). They aren't The Pinnacle of Fiction, but they WERE very entertaining. I had fun following the story, with its surprises and general soap-opera-feel. If I were a literature geek (like my wife ;)), I would likely recognize more general themes and cliches, and maybe even criticise it for that. But, let's face it. I like Star Wars, the Lord of the Rings, and pretty much any story involving magic, technology, technology and magic, or even just stories of A Geeky Kid who Makes Good. :D All of these reasons are why I love the Harry Potter series.

Summary of the story

[Frogbert]

1. Harry goes to school.
2. After a few weeks something weird starts to happen.
3. Ignore it until just before the school year ends.
4. Find out what was causing whatever was weird to happen.
5. Defeat it/Showdown with Voldemort.

But seriously I love the books.

Re:Summary of the story

[Broken scope]

I think you for got 2 steps. N: ?????????? N: PROFIT?!

Re:Summary of the story

[ocbwilg]

1. Harry goes to school.

Ha! You're obviously wrong, as Hogwart's was closed at the end of book 6 and Harry wasn't planning on going back anyways! Loser!

Re:Summary of the story

[complete loony]

Judging from the end of the last book, I think step 1 will not apply to this book.

Some others:

Something magical happens during summer break.
Hagrid says something he's not supposed to.
There's a confrontation with Malfoy.
Harry and friends break school rules, lie about it, then are praised for saving the day by their teachers.

Re:Summary of the story

[Anonymous Coward]

Missed one:
2.5 Harry stars in the school production of Equus, and gets rave reviews.

Re:Summary of the story

[melikamp]

GP is spot-on.

1. Harry goes to school. 2. After a few weeks something weird starts to happen.

The doors are locked, teachers and students are nowhere to be found, Quidditch match seems to be canceled.

3. Ignore it until just before the school year ends.

Harry wonders the halls and checks the owl-mail every half an hour.

4. Find out what was causing whatever was weird to happen.

After adding up all of the clues he gathered throughout the semester, Harry decides to check the Message Board. It reveals that the school is not in session. Harry suspects that Voldemort is to blame, but no one believes him.

5. Defeat it/Showdown with Voldemort.

To confirm Harry's fears, Voldemort finally shows up. He explains that he spent all this time looking for Harry, but he never expected him to be in a closed-up school, out of all places. He is tries to cast Avada Kedavra, but fails because he cannot stop laughing. Harry escapes victorious once again.

What? NOT a Vista article?

[GFree]

Unless this new Harry Potter book has some gratuitous Microsoft/Vista-basing incorporated somehow, it has no place on Slashdot!

Re:What? NOT a Vista article?

[GFree]

Hmm.

My first moderation was "Troll". Then someone finally realises that I was making a light-hearted JOKE about the Vista articles here, and that results in a second moderation of "Funny". Congrats to the latter, check your insecury to the former.

Since when do books have more than one edition?

[Anonymous Coward]

"A deluxe edition for collectors and enthusiasts is also planned with a simultaneous release."

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Deluxe Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ultimate Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Home Premium Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Home Basic Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Business Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Enterprise Edition ...

Don't think it won't happen.

Re:Since when do books have more than one edition?

[billster0808]

Dont forget: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows-N to comply with those silly EU anti-trust laws

Re:Since when do books have more than one edition?

[Schmiggy_JK]

Your forgot: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ultimate Signed by JK Rowling and Limited Numbered Edition. :)

Re:Since when do books have more than one edition?

[Enigmafan]

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Deluxe Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Ultimate Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Home Premium Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Home Basic Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Business Edition
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Enterprise Edition ... All versions come in the same book, but depending on the license code, you may read different parts of the book.

Re:Since when do books have more than one edition?

[Flyboy Connor]

You forgot: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, The Director's Cut. This one differs significantly from the regular editions in that Harry actually DOES die at the end. It is also 135 pages longer, with some additional material in Chapters 3, 7, 8, 16, 18, and 26, besides the completely rewritten version of Chapters 27 and 28.

Re:Since when do books have more than one edition?

[plankrwf]

Don't think it won't happen. Probably not, if only to avoid problems like these

Re:Since when do books have more than one edition?

[ObscureStooge]

Is that the one where Harry fires first?

Gotta give her credit

[edwardpickman]

All jokes aside it's impressive accomplishment to go from a single mother on the dole to the most successful author of all time and she's still relatively young. The big question really has to be what next?

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Bwana Geek]

I'm guessing we go 2 or 3 years with nothing, then out comes Harry Potter Jr. and the Redundant Storyline of Destiny.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[koreth]

Or, perhaps, that it does, and the people who say that are often trying to convince themselves that it's okay their finances are a mess?

Re:Gotta give her credit

[ezratrumpet]

Her literary allusions are far from contrived. The HP books are accessible to children and sophisticated enough for the discerning reader. She's shown every indication of sharing her immense wealth and has done nothing to flaunt her success.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[dr_dank]

The Harry Potter series may not be Ulysses, but it did weave a tapestry of fantasy that not only appealed to a wide range of readers, but also grew with the kids that they were primarily aimed at. The protagonist went from having normal adolescent troubles being the most of his worries to being thrust into adulthood to face a showdown with a frightfully powerful antagonist and his followers. Green Eggs and Ham, this ain't.

All this aside, when has there been this much hoopla over a book in recent times? People will camp out in front of stores for the latest game consoles, hottest movies, etc, but its truely unique to see that kind of reception for a book. Instead of rotting their brains in front of the tv sets, kids are exercising their imaginations with these books and *gasp* even picking up other books along the way. Kids who may not have otherwise gotten into reading for pleasure have been introduced to it from reading Harry Potter.

If this is "catering to the lowest common denominator", then I say we need much more of it.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[NMerriam]

She's the literary Britney Spears.

In their own times, so were Charles Dickens and William Shakespeare. Don't even get me started on Dumas.

The only question is whether the story and craft appeals across generations, which Harry Potter seems to do very well so far.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[daviddennis]

i have enjoyed reading her books.

I have never, at any point, enjoyed the "music" created by Britney Spears.

The fact that people ranging from kids to Slashdotters to more or less typical adults have enjoyed the books seems like an excellent tribute to their quality. It's very hard writing something a general audience enjoys. In particular, very few science fiction/fantasy authors have done it.

I think fans of SF/fantasy should be congratulating her on her success instead of trying to cut her down.

The general public sometimes shows surprisingly decent taste. This is one of these times.

D

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Mountaineer1024]

Whilst she's certainly rich, I wouldn't describe her as the most successful author of all time.
Not even the most successful in her genre.
I mean compare the number of bibles around the world to harry potter books :P

Re:Gotta give her credit

[nomadic]

Harry Potter's success is mostly from momentum. People hear it's good. They read it. A lot of them generally don't read much, so they're surprised to find out how enjoyable reading is. They assume it's just these books. They tell other people about how good these specific books are. And so on.

I read a few of them, they're pretty good, but they do have serious flaws that keep me from being a fan.

For example...

Harry Potter apparently never loses. It gets annoying. I mean, he seems to come out in front in every confrontation throughout the books, so there's no build up of tension, no waiting for him to finally win, etc. It gets boring.

Also the whole if-I-only-knew-my-parents thing just gets so old and worn. It's been done so many times in fantasy. But then again, the author manages to hit almost cliche out there, so not surprising she hit this one.

Of course, the most annoying part about Harry Potter is the fans, but you all knew that already...

Re:Gotta give her credit

[R_Ramjet]

Welcome Back Potter?

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Dun Malg]

Harry Potter apparently never loses. It gets annoying. I mean, he seems to come out in front in every confrontation throughout the books, so there's no build up of tension, no waiting for him to finally win, etc. It gets boring. What's even worse is that he wins not through hard work, or intelligence, but through (bad) serendipity, or (worse) some innate ability he never had to learn, but just discovers just in time. Nothing but deus ex machina crap.
Least Interesting Character Ever.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite a presumption there, that the only reason people don't have pots of money is because "their finances are a mess". What about "because they choose to spend their time with people who matter" rather than sinking the hours of their life into doing whatever needs to be done to earn pots of money?

I'm speaking from personal experience. A project I worked on went on to earn over $500 million. The people involved pocketed between nine and seven figures each. The cost was five years of their life. I left early in the piece, didn't get the money but am the happiest I have ever been in my life (IMO opinion happier than the rich guys, but I don't really know what their lives are like.) Looking from the outside it would seem that the nine figure guys almost lost their marriages over it.

Another project went the other way. This time the company went out backwards. I had gold fever and didn't bail early enough the second time. I got away with a bad taste in my mouth and a legal battle with the company. Well and truly in the past now. The boss of the company, the truest believer, lost his marriage, his reputation and ended up fleeing the country (still running).

The problem isn't the money directly. It is the attempt that destroys you, whether it be successful or not. If you are successful you generally (there are exceptions) come out the other end a self centred bastard who only cares about "mine" and are deluded that people like you for reasons other than your money. Better to get on with what matters in life and if it happens to make you rich as a side effect then so be it, but don't go in with the aim of making money or it will destroy you.

If Rowling managed to earn pots of money while remaining a balanced human being then kudos to her. If she is the exception it could be because the pots of money were an unintended side effect (at least for the first book)? Here's something to broaden your horizons.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Reality Master 101]

All jokes aside, I know what she should do. I think she should write a book of short stories. With her imagination, she probably has a zillion of them. And the book would be of sufficiently different type that it would be hard to compare to Harry Potter. It also improves the odds of there being *something* that most people would like, so it wouldn't be the inevitable reaction of, "this book is okay, but it's not as good as Harry Potter."

Re:Gotta give her credit

[noidentity]

"The big question really has to be what next?"

Hmmm... let me think. Another Harry Potter book?

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Gogogoch]

You just sound jealous of her success and want to rubbish her achievement. Her output is more earnest than you make it out to be, and more considered. The fact that it is read with admiration by a huge spectrum of people from all walks of life, education, income, background, nationality, age, race etc is the proof of the pudding. You can't trash something that is so popular with such a large proportion of society as being trivial and schlock, as you put it. In other words, you can't be right and the rest of the world be wrong. Appreciation of a novel, or a work like hers, is an open and transparent effect. It's not like smoking or climate change which were for many years murky subjects confused by misinformation and where the publc we misinformed or simply ignorant of the facts -that emerged slowly. A book is a book; it either appeals to someone or not. There's no more to it than that. So, if her work continues to appeal to new generations you have to admit its qualities.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Nakoruru]

The GP poster probably did not mean to demean Seuss, but was just looking for an example and missed the mark. Perhaps the Bearinstein Bears would have been a better example.

Seuss's books tackled topics like racism, the tragedy of the commons, and even the nuclear arms race. The Cat in the Hat can be thought of as being fairly subversive but mostly harmless. Most people probably only thing about the more traditional children's topics like accepting people who are different and not being afraid to try new things (like Green Eggs and Ham).

Before his books he created propaganda for the US government during WWII.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[rblancarte]

I think it is also impressive how much of an influence these books have had kids. There is a generation of kids that are just waiting for these books so they can read them. I can't think of any book that has had that kind of an impact.

In many ways, anyone who attacks these books because they preach witchcraft etc COUGH*COUGH*CHURCH*TYPES*COUGH*COUGH are completely missing what these books have done.

RonB

Re:Gotta give her credit

[kz45]

"I'm speaking from personal experience. A project I worked on went on to earn over $500 million. The people involved pocketed between nine and seven figures each. The cost was five years of their life. I left early in the piece, didn't get the money but am the happiest I have ever been in my life (IMO opinion happier than the rich guys, but I don't really know what their lives are like.) Looking from the outside it would seem that the nine figure guys almost lost their marriages over"

How does one have anything to do with another? It sounds like sour grapes to me.

"The problem isn't the money directly. It is the attempt that destroys you, whether it be successful or not. If you are successful you generally (there are exceptions) come out the other end a self centred bastard who only cares about "mine" and are deluded that people like you for reasons other than your money. Better to get on with what matters in life and if it happens to make you rich as a side effect then so be it, but don't go in with the aim of making money or it will destroy you"

It sounds like you are bitter from getting fucked over too many times (next time learn to watch out for people that could potentially take your money). Money nor the attempt destroys you. I feel that you can do what matters in life and make lots of money (when you have lots money you can do the following:

1) take as many vacations as you want
2) spend more time with your family
3) spend more time with your kids
4) spend more time with your wife

What you choose to do with your money is what matters..not the mere fact of making it.

working a regular 9-5 sucks the living soul out of a person.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[halovaa]

Yeah, but has she helped the Doctor prevent the destruction of the Earth, like those guys did? I didn't think so! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shakespeare_Code http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unquiet_Dead

Re:Gotta give her credit

[PCM2]

All this aside, when has there been this much hoopla over a book in recent times?

I dunno. I seem to remember a mindless schlock treasure-hunt beach novel called The Da Vinci Code, which actually sold so well in hardcover that the publisher delayed the paperback edition for a year or more.

In principle, I agree that anything that gets people to read who otherwise wouldn't is a good thing. It is a little disappointing, though, to see so many people reading just that one thing, and that one thing only, again and again, when that one thing isn't particularly good.

A really great achievement would be to get people to read and then keep them reading. In that respect, I'd actually credit Oprah Winfrey with more literacy in America than J.K. Rowling. Look at the past reading list of Oprah's book club and you'll see what I mean.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Mateito]

No. Novelists are frustrated short story writers. Writers of short stories are frustrated poets.

Rowling puts together good, simple story arcs expressed in accessible language. She is not a brilliant writer.

Still, she's now at that point where she could put here name on a bound copy on selected comments from the samba source code and it would sell a billion copies. Alternatively, she could buy 1/3 of 1% of Microsoft.

Despite that, Harry Potter books make good airport novels. Most importantly, they've dragged kids away from the idiot box and got them reading and using their imaginations.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[kfg]

People will camp out in front of stores for the latest game consoles, hottest movies, etc, but its truely unique to see that kind of reception for a book.

And people will turn whore for crack, that doesn't exactly imply that it's the good shit.

Kids who may not have otherwise gotten into reading for pleasure have been introduced to it from reading Harry Potter.

Yeah, there is that. A lot of them went on to read . . .The Da Vinci Code.

KFG

Re:Gotta give her credit

[PCM2]

In their own times, so were Charles Dickens and William Shakespeare. Don't even get me started on Dumas.

Meh, it sounds witty but I don't see the evidence. The mere fact that all these works have lasted the ages is evidence that they are not the schlock you're painting them to be. There were other writers working in each of these gentlemen's eras whom you've never heard of.

Example: A contemporary of Shakespeare, Miguel de Cervantes, published the first half of his novel, Don Quixote, in 1605. He wouldn't publish the second half until ten years later. But the first half was such a critical and popular success that it inspired another writer to publish a spurious sequel before Cervantes was able to get out his own conclusion. So I guess, by the standard of mass popularity, you could say Cervantes, like Shakespeare, was "the Britney Spears of his age." And yet I guarantee you that you can find a copy of Cervantes' legitimate second half of Don Quixote in your local library -- possibly several different translations -- but you will not find a copy of the fake sequel. One is timeless literature. The other is forgotten schlock.

Just because something is popular doesn't make it schlock. What makes it schlock, after the roar of the crowd has faded, is whether it's actually any good.

And, that said, I'm not a great fan of the Harry Potter books but I don't know if I'd categorize them as schlock, either. Great literature? No. But they have every indication of standing the test of time and remaining some of our most-loved juvenile fiction.

(Rabid fans, take note: Juvenile fiction.)

Re:Gotta give her credit

[PachmanP]

Feeling a little trollish...

You posit that since a large portion of society likes it; it must be good, no?

But the largest portion of society is stupid. This can be agreed upon certainly by most of /. If you need more proof see "The Internet".

Therefore, lots of stupid people like the book.

Stupid people like stupid things. See Survivor.

In conclusion, Harry Potter must be stupid.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[PachmanP]

No I did fairly well in logic but this is /. so proper logic wouldn't get me anywhere. I guess I should have ended it with therefore Windoze sux0rs!!!111onone! That might be a little more appropriate.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[75th Trombone]

Except that she's explicitly said that she'll never write another HP after Book 7. She always, from the earliest moments of her HP imaginings, intended there to be exactly seven HP books.

She's said that she might someday release a volume with all her notes and sketches from her HP-writing years, and I wouldn't put it past her to do another charity HP-related book (yes, she's written two short books for charity: Quidditch Through the Ages and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them), but no more novels.

You can disbelieve her now if you want, but wait and see; she'll stick to what she said.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[otie]

Nah, it'll be a series of prequels set in Harry's early years.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[EveLibertine]

I have never, at any point, enjoyed the "music" "created by" Britney Spears.

FTFY

Also, to take your point a bit further, the traditional fantasy novel that appeals to it's typical niche audience is almost designed in a way to be unappealing to the general populace. Long drawn out histories that have no real meaning to the storyline, overdrawn over-dramatic characters, and just a lot of general nonsense.

In contrast, it's the simple, practically cardboard cutout characters, and basic hero/villain stories that seem to have an impact on the largest audience.
The simplicity of the Monomyth still has great appeal.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[jd]

Alan Garner went from writing successful children's fantasy to writing swords-and-sorcery novels for adults. Tolkien went from The Hobbit to Lord of The Rings, although that's slightly different as he'd worked on early parts of The Silmarilian from before The Hobbit. Terry Pratchett has ventured into young kids books (The Diggers, Only You Can Save Mankind, etc) and also more sophisticated stories (Good Omens), as side projects from his Discworld series. I can't remember if C.S. Lewis did the Narnia stories before or after Out Of The Silent Planet.

The common theme is that these all play to a totally different audience. Different age bracket, different interests, different emphasis, even if the basic genre always stayed the same. On that basis, I'm going to guess JKR will do the same. She has already said she will use a pen-name, so that the book will stand or fall on its own merits - which is a brave but actually very respectable and civilized standpoint. It does mean, though, that we won't know she is the author for some time. I expect her next books to be aimed more at middle-aged women, but more along the Mary Stewart style than the Mills And Boone. That guess is because I can't see how much more opposite you could get and stay in the same genre.

(Here's one possibility. There are claims that Bodecca - the Icini Queen who launched one of the most terrifying rebellions Rome ever faced and is used to this day as an icon of terror for Italian children - was a druidess. Nobody I know of has ever written a fantasy novel based on Bodecca, let alone one that ventured into the mysticism and old magic of that era. I could easily see JKR being able to turn such a figure into a truly powerful lead character - a vengeance-seeking blood-thirsty sword-wielding Hermione on steroids. Though she, no doubt, has plenty of ideas of her own.)

Re:Gotta give her credit

[corky842]

Yeah. Harry's always saved by his good friend, Plot Device.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[miyako]

I suggest you read books 5 and 6, and to a lesser extent 4. What you point out is pretty heavily used in the first three books, and a bit in book 4 as well. By the end of book 4 and during 5 and 6 however, things definitely begin to change. Harry still wins for the most part, but it becomes less about serendipity and hidden powers, and more about paying the price for good. There is a scene early on in book 6 where harry confronts malfoy, and ends up petrified on the floor with a broken nose from malfoy stomping his face in. Not to mention the deaths of Sirius and Dumbledore.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[ArcticCelt]

Another thing that annoys me is that in the first book Harry was that little smart and very courageous "Cinderella style" kid who enjoyed the little he has. Then in the following books he have everything: wealth, popularity, people who loves him and success but then he keeps complaining, whining and screaming at his friends. I guess the author wanted to depict some stereotypical adolescent crisis but it his really annoying to think that kids identify themselves to that attitude.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Simon Garlick]

How's this for scary:

"The sixth book of the (Potter) series sold more copies in 24-hours than The Da Vinci Code sold in a year. (The Da Vinci Code was the best-selling book of the previous year.)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._K._Rowling

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Duds]

If she's the literally Britney Spears that's good work.

Because the market she's actually going for is the same level as "Roger Red Hat", "Spot the Dog" and "Where's Waldo?".

If nothing else, she's got young kids reading full length books in a way no-one else has managed in the (ugh) "Playstation era".

If she's Britney, she's Britney when before there was only "The wheels on the bus go round and round"

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Gabrill]

No, then she builds a Harry Potter empire from spin-offs and royalties.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Solol]

Wouldn't the figure include all the book pre-ordered months before the publishing date ?

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Skrynesaver]

True, but the misery is easier to bear in comfort

Re:Gotta give her credit

[IronChefMorimoto]

Don't even get me started on Dumas. Now THERE's a phrase I NEVER expected to see in /. comments...

IronChefMorimoto

Re:Gotta give her credit

[GospelHead821]

I agree with your assessment that the Harry Potter books are juvenile fiction, but they are also a refreshing deviation from the spineless stories that have passed for juvenile fiction for years. They are, furthermore, entertaining enough to be enjoyable light reading for adults. Although they may be targeted at adolescents, they appeal to a larger audience, which is a noteworthy attribute. In my opinion, the Harry Potter books are a model of quality juvenile fiction. They are literary enough and bold enough that they are likely to inspire readers to continue reading even after they've grown out of juvenile fiction. Previously, I was of the opinion that most juvenile fiction set kids up for disappointment when they found failure, death, and other unhappy endings in more adult fiction.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[crush]

Plausible speculation, and JKR should take your advice.

Slightly irrelevant sidenote:
I haven't read them for about 20 years but I seem to remember Alan Garner's stuff as much more confusing and complex psychologically than Harry Potter. I actually didn't like most of it very much but I remember IIRC The Owl Service fairly clearly. It troubled me.

Even more irrelevant sidenote:
Out of the Silent Planet, along with Perelandra are (IMO) fairly awful, however That Hideous Strength is entertainingly schlocky, very different from the rest of the trilogy (apart from the presence of the loathsome Ransome (to whom we are all as women!)). It includes a re-awakened Merlin, mad scientists, talking brains in jars, a NAZI-like police state taking over England, the lesbian chief of the secret police (Fairy Hardcastle) with a taste for sadist interrogations of pure young ladies. Awesome. C.S.Lewis should have done more of that sort of thing. There's also a BBC Radio 4 adaptation of it from some time between 1990 and 1995 which is very well done.

I'm holding out for a movie of it made by the re-united team of Jeunet & Caro (City of Lost Children, Delicatessen etc)

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Bwana Geek]

You don't think Harry Potter Jr. would qualify as a spin-off?

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Reality Master 101]

Rowling puts together good, simple story arcs expressed in accessible language. She is not a brilliant writer.

Simple story arcs? You either haven't read the books, or you didn't realize that the series is one book divided into seven parts, with a giant story arc and an enormous number of subplots. The brilliance of her writing is that you can either focus on the simple story arcs (which children tend to do), or the incredibly complex story arcs, depending on how deeply you delve into it. Take the question of the relationship between wizarding society and the Goblins and other "lesser" creatures. Interesting fountain in the Ministry, wasn't it?

Or Severus Snape, who is such a brilliant character that he can kill one of the biggest characters in the story and we STILL don't know what side he's on!

These novels are absolutely brilliant, deep and complex. And what's most amazing is that they can be read by such a wide age range and enjoyed. I actually pity people who don't really "get" them and think they're "just" children's books.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Bwana Geek]

Actually, I think you're on to something. The prequels would probably be about his parents, though, and not Harry's youth. After all, there wasn't really any magic in his life between his parents' deaths and his first year at Hogwarts, was there? I haven't read the books, only seen the movies, so I don't know for sure. It just seems that following Harry's father's exploits would be much more interesting than Harry's youth, in a series of books all leading up to the eventual death of his parents at the hands of Voldemort (sp?).

Re:Gotta give her credit

[phoenixwade]

well, that depends on how you spin the numbers....

    In the years released, each of her books outsold the bible
    All of her books outsold the bible in average yearly sales (total units and total sales)
    if you divide the number of estimated units sold by the number of (Human) Authors (20+ something for the Bible), and do the same For the HP books, She becomes more successful than any given Author.
    Seems like the only thing the Bible beats the HP books in is total copies distributed (over 400 or so years).

    Is she the most successful author of all time? In terms of total wealth derived from her work (the 'Common' definition of success). She's close enough that the 7th volume and the 5th movie coming out this year should put so much space between her and any other author. As of March 2006 she was worth 1 billion USD, making her the most wealthy Author of all time, 100% of that wealth derived from her works. Forbes magazine listed here as the wealthiest career author, and the second wealthiest woman in entertainment (behind Oprah). Ultimately, I'd have to say yes, she's the most successful author in history, in any Genre she is categorized in (Childrens Books, normally - but SF/F would apply as well) and as a total.

In terms of total copies of all books, I think that Agatha Christie still has sold more total copies than any other author, though.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[SuiteSisterMary]

Harry Potter: The Next Generation. Starring Wil Wheaton as Wesley Potter. Make sure you watch for the school councillor with the huge tatas. "I sense....frustration. Deep frustration and confusion. And...an obsession with wands."

Then: Harry Potter: Hogwarts Brine, wherein Hogwarts School of Wizardry and Witchcraft opens a new campus, deep under the ocean, near a magical portal to a different world. Make sure you watch for the local wife (with huge tatas) of the muggle arcade owner.

Soon to be followed by Harry Potter: Voyager, wherin a group of students, attempting to prank some townies/muggles, accidently transports themselves, and the townies/muggles, to a distant land, and they must make their way back. Make sure you watch for the evil alien who they try to convert to Hogwartsim, but it turns out that she was the daughter of a Hogwarts-funded research expedition; she has huge tatas.

Lamentably followed by Harry Potter: Dumbledore, wherein we find that Dumbledore used to be headmaster at a DIFFERNET school, that was NEVER PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED as existing, and infact CANNOT have existed given the existing canon, where they teach magic that is somehow MORE ADVANCED than what is later taught at Hogwarts. Make sure you watch out for the muggle school administrator with the huge tatas.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Thraxen]

I don't remember anyone camping out for The Da Vinci Code and it is already getting crushed in sales numbers. The impact of Orpah's book club is trivial in comparison. It's doesn't matter what's on the reading list. I could compile my own list that is more impressive. What matters in this case is how many people started reading due to each. I'd bet my last cent that the HP books have pulled in far more new readers than Orpah's book club. Especially among children, which is where it will do the most good.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Thraxen]

Even if true, that is still better than sitting in front of a TV. So what exactly is your point?

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Thraxen]

Wow... someone who actually gets the importance of the books and not just another literary snob who can't see beyond the classics they were force-fed in school and the latest critically overrated books.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[kabocox]

All jokes aside it's impressive accomplishment to go from a single mother on the dole to the most successful author of all time and she's still relatively young. The big question really has to be what next?

Um, nothing. I like Harry Potter, but I read tons of stuff. The only reason my wife and I bought Harry Potter was for the kids... Ok. We've read them more than the kids. I don't think Harry Potter is as good as the Discworld, the Miles series, (http://www.baen.com/author_catalog.asp?author=lmb ujold), the Honor verse, or Ringos set of novels. To me, Harry Potter is just another series of books. It's good and all, but it isn't all that great. Here is my simple prediction. She will withdraw from publicly writing books, yet attempt to publish other books under pen names. If the publishers don't know who she is, they'll reject her next book. She will then either politely let a publisher know who she is and that is supposed to be released under a pen name. The book will be released. We won't even notice it or the pen name. The publisher won't release the news that she was writing under the pen name even though it would make the book an instant best seller. The publisher will keep publishing her books under her pen name in hopes that she gets ticked at their sales numbers and releases the information herself. Once her "pen name" becomes public. The publisher of her books will finally get its money for publishing her second series. She will make best seller lists worldwide if only for those former Harry Potter readers that want to read anything by the same author. We will find the subject or characters of her new book will either been aimed at young adults or adults rather than kids; it will be "different" from Harry Potter. You will find massive amounts of Harry Potter fans that become divided in if they like the book/series. Most of them buy a copy so the publisher is happy. The writer doesn't need to write for money. She is doing for herself. She may decide to just write until her death and then have them all published after she's dead and buried. I don't know if Harry Potter will last that long into the future. Harry Potter isn't Sponge Bob and will be forgotten, but remembered as a kid thing when they hit college. Hmm... I might be wrong on that one. My kids will see Harry Potter as a kid's book that their parents liked to read, but they just never felt like finishing themselves. The movies were ok, but we've not let the kids see any of the latter ones. Our kids will like the forbidden fruit part of Harry Potter, but that'd disappear quickly. It's easy to read through the current Harry Potter series in about two weeks for a good reader. If my kids get into reading, Harry Potter will only be one plot line amongst many.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[kabocox]

All this aside, when has there been this much hoopla over a book in recent times? People will camp out in front of stores for the latest game consoles, hottest movies, etc, but its truely unique to see that kind of reception for a book. Instead of rotting their brains in front of the tv sets, kids are exercising their imaginations with these books and *gasp* even picking up other books along the way. Kids who may not have otherwise gotten into reading for pleasure have been introduced to it from reading Harry Potter.

If this is "catering to the lowest common denominator", then I say we need much more of it.

Hasn't worked in my family. My wife and I had read them all, but my kids haven't. I can read any single Harry Potter book in 2-3 nights. We've never had a problem picking up a Harry Potter book once it went on sale. I'm waiting for more books from these authors: David Weber, John Ringo, Lois McMaster Bujold, Jack L. Chalker, David Drake, Leo Frankowski, Eric Flint, Dave Freer, Mercedes Lackey, Elizabeth Moon, Larry Niven, Glen Cook and Wen Spencer. I'm sorry, one series doesn't an author make for me. I like having 2-3 series and alot of books to go through. I didn't touch Harry Potter until there were 4 books in the series to go through. You are right, any reading is better than no reading, but then she made movies out of the books...

Re:Gotta give her credit

[ChrisMaple]

In contrast to the Bible, most people who have Harry Potter books read them cover-to-cover. In addition, the Harry Potter books aren't being pushed by a semi-organized international cartel.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[kfg]

That content matters. A book can rot your brain, a TV show can illuminate it (and bear in mind that I've been accused of being an anti-TV whako in this forum and I live amongst piles of books.In omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro).

Mere reading is not inherently a virtue. Mere TV watching is not necessarily a sin.

And obsessive mass psychosis is never a good sign of anything.

KFG

Re:Gotta give her credit

[jd]

She only lost one battle like that. Mind you, that was sufficient. Earlier on, she'd ambushed a Roman legion and massacred the lot of them, and burned two Roman cities to the ground. Her defeat was at the hands of one of the best Roman commanders and two elite Roman legions who had earlier slaughtered the druids and defenders of the Isle of Anglsey, even though they had to wade through to water to get there. It is also worth noting that the Celts who marched with Hannibal were also massacred by the Romans - Hannibal used them as bait, so he could encircle the Romans.

So, compared to other Celts of the time, Bodecca actually did rather well, surviving three battles against Roman forces and only being beaten by a tactical genius. When compared against the tactical giants of Hannibal, Julius Caesar, Sun Tzu, Napoleon, Rommel and James Dalton*, Bodecca doesn't fare so well. However, it seems fairer to compare her against any other Celtic commander of the time, and none of the others come remotely close.

*Acting Commissary James Dalton is believed to have been the real leader of the defence of Rorke's Drift, in which 110 British soldiers held off 5,000+ Zulus armed with rifles for about 10 hours. As with all of the other commanders on the list, his ethics could not be called civilized, and morality was definitely something he'd have to look up in a dictionary, but you don't need ethics or morality to win fights.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Walter Carver]

Money is a necessary assumption for happyness, but not sufficient.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

Or, perhaps, that it does, and the people who say that are often trying to convince themselves that it's okay their finances are a mess?

Or perhaps people aren't happy yet don't have their finances in a mess, and they're pondering how that works.

Whenever Richard Cory went down town,
    We people on the pavement looked at him:
He was a gentleman from sole to crown,
    Clean favored, and imperially slim.

And he was always quietly arrayed,
    And he was always human when he talked;
But still he fluttered pulses when he said,
    "Good-morning," and he glittered when he walked.

And he was rich--yes, richer than a king,
    And admirably schooled in every grace:
In fine, we thought that he was everything
    To make us wish that we were in his place.

So on we worked, and waited for the light,
    And went without the meat, and cursed the bread;
And Richard Cory, one calm summer night,
    Went home and put a bullet through his head.

Re:Gotta give her credit

[Gogogoch]

Well I can't argue with that - especially the bit about Survivor :-) Except, maybe, to point out that the largest part of society is 'average' by, err, definition.

But remember - no generalization is correct!

s/wand/wang/g

[frogstar_robot]

http://www.bash.org/?111338

Re:s/wand/wang/g

[ShakaUVM]

That is one of the funniest things I've read in a long time.

Bless vi humor.

Re:s/wand/wang/g

[MORTAR_COMBAT!]

disturbing.

Good news for OOTP movie

[nebaz]

I'm sure the producers of the fifth Harry Potter movie are jumping for joy, as their movie comes out very close to that time (July 13). The publication of the last book would generate much more buzz about Harry Potter than any thing they could come up with for the movie on it's own.

Re:Good news for OOTP movie

[Frogbert]

Wow what an amazing and fortunate coincidence!

missed opportunity

[jtcm]

I can't believe they're not releasing the book 2 weeks ealier!

The 7th book should really be released on 7/7/07.

Re:missed opportunity

[SEMW]

...7th July has certain historical connotations for British people...

Re:missed opportunity

[maxume]

Great. All we need is 363 more terrorist attacks and nobody will be able to do anything anymore for fear of not being sensitive enough.

Re:missed opportunity

[diersing]

Not being British, do tell... I tried myself but came up empty - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_7

Re:missed opportunity

[SEMW]

Alright, being overly sensitive and PC is not necessarily a good idea -- but releasing a book that has terrorism and murder as key themes on a date specifically designed to draw attention to itself and the 7s in the date in order to attract publicity -- when that date is the second anniversary of 7/7... Well, the publicity generated might be a little bitter, that's all I'm saying. Boycotts don't help sales. Well, in the short run, anyway...

Re:missed opportunity

[SEMW]

You're joking, right? You've heard of 9/11 (11/9 in European convention), I trust?

Re:missed opportunity

[angrytuna]

I was curious about that too; the leaky cauldron fan site holds that it's the 10th anniversary of the pub date of book 1.

Then, of course, I felt a bit ashamed for going to look up the rationale of the release date. Put me in mind of a certain penny arcade cartoon.

Re:missed opportunity

[SetupWeasel]

If I get you correctly, you are saying they should wait until the seventh anniversary of 7/7 to release the book. Marketing Genius!

Re:missed opportunity

[BridgeBum]

Try the second to last 2005 event. Bombings in the London subway.

Re:missed opportunity

[maxume]

I doubt it would affect book sales much at all. There would be loud people in the media talking about how it wasn't right in so forth, but most people would just go buy the book, or they would pick it up on the 8th or whatever. To the vast majority of people, stopping little Johnny screaming is in fact quite a lot more important than some tight ass idea of what is proper.

I do find it strange to place such heightened importance on the deaths of people that are highly noticeable -- 9/11 for instance has taken an enormous amount of mind share in the US, but something like 100 people die in car accidents everyday in the US, so there have been tens of thousands of death attributable to living life since then, but people still talk about 'a post 9/11 world' and other stuff like that. The increased attention to security was perhaps a good thing(i.e., we were too lax prior), but the result has not been.

Re:missed opportunity

[BobNET]

Great. All we need is 363 more terrorist attacks and nobody will be able to do anything anymore for fear of not being sensitive enough.

That's okay, we'll still have February 29...

Re:missed opportunity

[Mad-cat]

I thought it was the 8th son of an 8th son of an 8th son.

Re:missed opportunity

[jZnat]

Nah, that day is reserved for Bungie (and their fascination of the number seven) to release Halo 3. ;p

Re:missed opportunity

[edashofy]

Well, July 21, 2007 is 7/(7+7+7)/07...

Or (7+7+7)/7/07 elsewhere

Or 2007-07-(7+7+7) if you want to make it sort

Re:missed opportunity

[gbjbaanb]

If it was released on the 7th.....

So Osama, praise be to Allah. Are we all ready for the devastating attacks which will finally bring the western capitalist pig-dogs to their knees?

Well, um, nearly... just let me get to the next chapter, Harry is about to discover the secret of the cauldron! Maybe we'll bring down western capitalism tomorrow.

That's good with me. Can I borrow it after you then?

Re:missed opportunity

[SpooForBrains]

Like fuck it does. I'm sorry, but just because the politicians need something to hold up every time they fuck something else up in the name of the War on Terror (Remember 7/7! Remember 7/7!) doesn't mean the rest of the country is busy sobbing into their cornflakes about it. It was just another bomb. We've been bombed before, and we'll be bombed again. The only people making a fuss about 7/7 are the politicians and the tabloids.

Re:missed opportunity

[Nutty_Irishman]

...7th July has certain historical connotations for British people... I agree, let's move it back to July 4th instead... ;)

Re:missed opportunity

[bkr1_2k]

There's already a childrens series of books based on the lead character being the seventh son of a seventh son. Go figure, it's fantasy and the kid is a sorcerer. The book is called Septimus Heape, and the sequel is Flyte. My daughter really enjoyed them and is waiting for the third to come out.

Re:missed opportunity

[talonyx]

No, because 7/7/7 is my wedding day and my wife-to-be will just stay home to read Harry Potter and skip the whole thing.

Re:missed opportunity

[diersing]

I hate to admit I've become so desensitized that 52 deaths didn't even register as significant to me. It seems that is about the average death toll coming out of Iraq each day. Thanks W.

Re:missed opportunity

[SEMW]

Sure, but 'not making a fuss about it' kind of includes not deliberately releasing a book on a date designed specifically to highlight it...

Re:missed opportunity

[ChrisMaple]

I know! Put it on sale on November 5 in Britain.

Re:missed opportunity

[ShadowsHawk]

Granted, I'm from the US, but I really don't understand your objection here. It's a painful memory of a horrible tragedy. Someone happens to release a novel on the same day and it's a personal insult to those that died two years ago? I think you and many others are overly sensitive. Personally, I'm off the belief that you can always walk away if you don't like something. Many people come out and protest the KKK when they rally. Why bother? They might have a handful of supporters show up, but the protesters are what draw in the cameras.

Re:missed opportunity

[SEMW]

Someone happens to release a novel on the same day and it's a personal insult to those that died two years ago? Are you deliberately misquoting? The OP asked why the publishers didn't choose to release on 7/7/07; I answered why. Could you please point to where I said anything even remotely similar to "release a novel on the same day and it's a personal insult to those that died two years ago"?

Besides, even from Bloomsbury/Scholarest's point of view, the main point isn't that it isn't a good day to release a novel in general -- considering how many novels are released every day, probably quite a few will be released on 7/7/07 -- but releasing a book that has terrorism and murder as key themes on a date specifically designed to draw attention to itself and the 7s in the date in order to attract publicity? Not good PR.

Ma-Fi???

[Wilson_6500]

We already have a genre for "Magic Fiction."

Fantasy.

Re:Ma-Fi???

[User 956]

We already have a genre for "Magic Fiction." Fantasy.

I thought that was the genre for those novels at the supermarket with Fabio on the cover?

Re:Ma-Fi???

[rblancarte]

We already have a genre for "Magic Fiction." Fantasy.

I thought that was the genre for those novels at the supermarket with Fabio on the cover? No that is called Trash.

RonB

Re:Ma-Fi???

[ameoba]

Close - that's "delusional".

Re:Ma-Fi???

[heyitsgogi]

Isn't sci-fi, after all, a type of fantasy? Whether you're dreaming of elves of spaceships, it's all a fantasy... You can argue that sci-fi *could* exist in the future, but certainly (back to the future *cough cough*) it's not necessary.

Re:Ma-Fi???

[jagspecx]

We already have a genre for "Magic Fiction." Fantasy.

I thought that was the genre for those novels at the supermarket with Fabio on the cover?

No that is called Trash.

No, no.... Trash-Fi

Re:Ma-Fi???

[AK Marc]

Isn't sci-fi, after all, a type of fantasy?

"Fantasy" is a genre. Fantasy as a generic word could cover all fiction and half of what's released as non-fiction. With that definition, the word is useless. Fantasy as a genre is the one with trolls and gnomes and magic. Sci-fi might be the same with troll-like aliens, gnome-like aliens, and magic-like technology, but they aren't the same thing.

Great!

[gulfan]

I can't wait till Raincoast Books subpoena me again for disclosing the ending! Time to get Leonard J. Crabs ready for this one.

Re:Great!

[gulfan]

Incase nobody remembers, here is the post that was removed due to DCMA. http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=155566&cid=130 39593

Adult edition?

[Elouise]

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Harry-Potter-Deathly-Hallo ws-Adult/dp/B000M2DJQI/ref=pd_bxgy_b_text_b/202-14 18729-1355842 Does this mean that "Harry" gets his kit off in relation to some animal that hagrid brings home?

Re:Adult edition?

[SEMW]

Does this mean that "Harry" gets his kit off in relation to some animal that hagrid brings home? They've been there, done that, made it into a stage play...

Re:Adult edition?

[Elouise]

yeah hence my comment...

Profit!

[wasted]

So, wonder when the "Harry dies on page..." shirts come out?

1. Set up Cafe Press account to sell "Harry Dies on Page ...?" shirts.
2. Advertise by posting on Slashdot.
3. Avoid lawsuits by .....?
4. Profit!

Can someone help me with step 3?

Re:Profit!

[Korin43]

Say you're protesting the stupidity of harry potter books, and are therefore protected by the first amendment.

Re:Profit!

[bladesjester]

No lawsuits. It's parody, which is allowed. =]

Re:Difference Between Childrens' and Adults' Versi

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah. It's just the covers that differ. Something about adults not wanting to be seen reading a kid's book, or some such.

Me, I'll take whatever's going cheaper, and around here, that's the "children's" version.

Spoilers...

[penguin_dance]

I've got the scoop the story:
"The school and Harry's friends are scandalized when he shows up to the prom naked on a horse."

Ooops...sorry, wrong story.

Re:Spoilers...

[ralphc]

Must...resist...magic...wand...jokes...

Re:Spoilers...

[Minwee]

On the other hand, it looks like some of the fanfic writers were right.

Re:in the future

[Duct Tape Jedi]

have you read any of the books? they are good! I don't care how old you are! Yes I might be a little drunk right now cause I discovered a liquor store that lets me make my own 6pack of beer but these books are great! I sure I'm not being as coherent as I usually am due to my BAC but yeah . . . . . . oh yeah I would also go as far to say that reading these books might be considered at least a little bit nerdy and therefore might explain why its on /.

The release date will be delayed 17 times

[Anonymous Coward]

And when it's finally released, the middle 300 pages that promised all kinds of things will be missing.

That'll make it a Vista article.

Re:Difference Between Childrens' and Adults' Versi

[porcupine8]

They just have different covers, so you're not reading something with a cartoon on the cover on the bus.

Re:in the future

[lazycam]

I stand corrected.

Re:Harry Potter and the Grammar Nazi?

[DragonTHC]

have you ever seen the word muggle used before?
how about dumbledore?

then shut your typing fingers up!

Re:Harry Potter and the Grammar Nazi?

[Yosho]

"Deathly" is a perfectly good word. It means "like or resembling death." "Deadly," on the other hand, means "causing death."

Re:Difference Between Childrens' and Adults' Versi

[kfg]

You mean I'm supposed to be hiding my Myth books? Now you tell me. Oh, the shame.

KFG

I prefer Barry Trotter

[OzPeter]

Barry Trotter is more fun to read, but the really best thing is that the books are about one tenth the size for the same entertainment.

Re:I prefer Barry Trotter

[bladesjester]

The books are good, and I can also give a thumbs up to the Barry Trotter and the Unauthorized Parody audiobook. They guy reading it does a fantastic job.

My girlfriend and I were listening to it for the heck of it and making fun of just how well he's able to sound like some of the characters from the Harry Potter movies.

Re:in the future

[SEMW]

have you read any of the books? they are good! I don't care how old you are! Yes I might be a little drunk right now... Woah... An increase in teenage drinking... Record-setting Harry Potter book sales...

I think I spot a connection!

No he doesn't

[OzPeter]

RMS says boycott buying the books, not reading them. Read your own link.

Re:No he doesn't

[grimJester]

I thought he was Hagrid?

Re:Harry Potter and the Grammar Nazi?

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Horcruxes.

Horcruxen?

Re:Sweeeet!

[Anonymous Coward]

omg you should do that while dressed up as wizards, having sex

Robot Chicken: Harry Potter battles Pubertas

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjLBCH6VTvQ

Re:Harry Potter and the Grammar Nazi?

[dbIII]

Is this a difference between (UK) English and American English

Yes, and it tends to "loose" something in translation :)

I cant wait

[indraneil]

I agree that the basic storyline has always been the same, but I find it readable none the same and it is to the credit of JKR that she manages to keep me as hooked now as I was, a decade ago (when I was a teen).
The difference between the two editions is not in the content but in the book binding and the covers of the same
You may see the differences in covers here.
The top row is the children's version, incase, you fail to get it!!

Savage Sig

[camperdave]

I don't like numbers which can't be written as fractions. It's an irrational fear.

That almost seems like a Savage Chickens joke.

Re:Sweeeet!

[hey!]

Actually, we do the same thing. We actually started doing this with the Elizabeth Peters mysteries while my wife was in labor with our first child. It was a way to get through the waiting besides watching the contraction lines on the monitor.

The problem with the Harry Potter books is that my wife cheats and sneak reads ahead.

Semi offtopic

[fletchermemorial]

Does anyone know if the movies are all going in production? I heard rumor that the next movie is going to be the last one, but I found no verifiable sources online...well, none that seemed legitimate anyways

Re:Semi offtopic

[BCW2]

Order of the Phoenix will be out on July 13. Should make for an interesting 8 days. From everything I've picked up there will be at least one more. I can't believe that anyone would willingly turn off this money machine.

Re:Semi offtopic

[Kelson]

The movies have done quite well so far. #5 is being released this year, leaving only two more books to adapt.

I can't imagine that the studio would stop making the films until they either run out of source material or stop making scads of money.

I have seen interviews in which some of the actors have talked about leaving the series, though. And considering the leads have basically spent their entire adolescence making these movies, that's somewhat understandable. In this case, the role(s) would almost certainly be recast -- unless movie #5 flops.

Re:Semi offtopic

[Sounder40]

The screenwriter for the first four, Steve Kloves, decided not to do the fifth book to pursue other work, and to spend time with his family. But after reading the sixth book, he call the producer, David Heyman, and asked if he could do it, who gladly resigned him.

The screenplay for the sixth book has been written and approved, and should start shooting soon, though I don't know exactly when. It was my understanding that the screenplays for the fifth and sixth book were being developed at the same time so that they could be shot close to each other, but since they haven't started shooting the sixth. And it seems that one of the leads, Daniel Radcliffe, is a little busy right now.

I would certainly count on a sixth movie. I believe the principles are all signed except for Daniel Radcliffe. Time will tell.

Re:'scifi'?

[jmorris42]

The same sort of mental disease that infects the Sci-Fi Channel. The kind that called John Edwards (The biggest Douche in the Universe) Sci Fi. The sort of idiots who call Freddy and Jason Sci Fi. Bugger em all.

Harry Potter is FANTASY people, not Sci Fi. If it has 'magic' and elves in it is NOT Sci Fi. Not that I won't be reading this final installment, I will. But it is a pet peeve, especially when the Sci-Fi Channel wastes such a large portion of their day running stuff that is NOT Sci-Fi.

Not me...

[Viceroy Potatohead]

I'll stick with the (ahem), less derivative: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Stouffer

Pics of Larry:
http://www.geocities.com/versetrue/rowling.htm

Re:Not me...

[75th Trombone]

Because illustrations on a Geocities website are incontrovertible when compared with courts' finding that she doctored evidence to support her claim.

Re:Not me...

[Viceroy Potatohead]

You missed my joke. Probably my fault, and undoubtedly it was a weak joke. If Barry Trotter is more fun to read and as much entertainment at a tenth the size, imagine how great Larry Potter must be, at 0/10th the size. Links were provided for info (wiki) and amusement (geo). Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Re:Not me...

[75th Trombone]

Nah, I'm the one who owes the apologies. I took "Pictures of Larry" to mean "Pctures that prove something" rather than "Haha look at this crap".

Hairy Potter?

[68th Overlord]

"where Hairy and lee adama"

Slip of the keyboard there?

Maybe the poster had been looking at these recent photos of Daniel Radcliffe:

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/index.php?articl eID=9447

OMG!!! Ponies!!1

[Foerstner]

Seriously, though. Will read it, once the front-line fans have finished and they'll loan me a copy.

Re:Sweeeet!

[aaza]

I put on my robe and wizard hat...

Re:in the future

[StikyPad]

That's Freakonomical!

Harry Potter Naked

[jjohnson]

Daniel Radcliffe acting in Equus. Saucy photo included.

Who'da thunk it? Harry Potter has a treasure trail.

Sing along...

[LardBrattish]

The Wizard's staff has a knob on the end...

Re:Sing along...

[indifferent children]

The Wizard's staff has a knob on the end...

That's odd; this guy's staff seems to have a knob on both ends.

I enjoy spoilers.

[Kaenneth]

Fake spoilers.

So that noone knows which spoilers are the 'real' ones.

plus, the off chance on being right.

Ginny dies.

Re:Sci Fi^H^H^H^H^H FANTASY!!!

[rblancarte]

AMEN.

This is my biggest problem w/ people posting their own works. Because while maybe they have some good stuff to contribute, I know they are really just looking for people to get clicks on their page.

And overall, I think the official release on site or any of the numerous sites that cover this would have done better.

And why no props for JK Rowling herself?

RonB

Every day in the year has historical connotations

[patio11]

Is there a single day when hundreds of brave Brits have not died in, I don't know, pick a conflict? WWII works as a good canonical example in the US, lets try for Britain. "Its March 8th... uh oh, Hitler dropped some bombs on us a couple of decades ago, not a good day to release a new novel." "Yeah, the bugger bombed us... we bombed back. Guess who won. Sod off if you think I'm going to let that wanker get in the way of me enjoying Harry Potter." (Stiff upper lip, football fan style.)

I'm an American and once got asked by my Japanese bosses on December 7th whether I felt anything special about the day. "Well, we have a saying in English: 'time heals all wounds'". I did not add that we have a saying in America: it is very easy to become friends with your enemies after you have beaten the stuffing out of them.

Re:Sweeeet!

[LordEd]

If anybody needs the reference, you can find it here

Or . . .

[StefanJ]

Ginny doesn't die.

Ever.

"Attention first years! This is the Griffindor house ghost, Gyrating Ginny."

Re:Or . . .

[SEE]

What, not even le petit mort? That's cold, man.

Couldn't resist.

[Kadin2048]

The problem with the Harry Potter books is that my wife cheats ...

To be fair, I'm not sure why that's Harry Potter's problem.

12:01 am, what IS that?!

[G3ckoG33k]

Sorry, but I'm am not sure I understand the writing "12:01 am". In my world 12:01 is either one minute after noon or midnight.In my world "am" is between midnight and noon. But I just don't get it what happens when you combine them!

11:01 am is about one hour before noon, during midday. 11:59 am is one minute before noon, also midday. But, 12:00 during midday is that "pm" or "am"? I would guess "am", but I'm not sure. Can you really say thing like 16:00 pm?! I thought that is a tautology, as 16:00 is always pm by definition as would 12:01 pm be. So, my guess is midnight (and as it is a Harry Potter book) and that they try to avoid the midnight double zeros in the more technically correct "00:01 am", but...

Please, what do they mean?!

(BTW, I'm from Europe)

Re:12:01 am, what IS that?!

[Kelson]

Ah, the 12-hour clock! Like inches, feet, yards and miles, something we can't quite bring ourselves to give up.

I probably have the Latin(?) spellings wrong, but here's what they mean:

AM = ante-meridian = before noon
PM = post-meridian = after noon

12:01 AM, therefore, is one minute after 12, and before noon. So, one minute after midnight.

Exact noon and midnight can't properly be said to be "before" or "after" noon -- on'e spot-on and the other's equidistant between two noons. But consider that one second after midnight is 12:00:01 AM, and one second after noon is 12:00:01 PM. It's more consistent for 12:00 AM to be midnight and 12:00 PM to be noon.

00:01 would be correct in a 24-hour clock, but not in a 12-hour clock. After all, there's no hour 0 on a clock face.

Re:12:01 am, what IS that?!

[Aranel Alasse]

"00:01 would be correct in a 24-hour clock, but not in a 12-hour clock."

Interestingly, JK Rowling actually stated (http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cf m?id=97):
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows will be published on Saturday 21st July 2007 at 00:01 BST in the UK and at 00:01 in the USA. It will also be released at 00:01 BST on Saturday 21st July in other English speaking countries around the world.

I might have been confused, too, had I not read the news from her site first. I'm not a fan of the 24-hour clock, but I do think we should call the first hour of the day 0:whatever AM, instead of 12:whatever AM. It definitely stops the confusion (for me, at least) before it even starts.

It's midnight

[Tim_UWA]

12pm is noon. 12am is midnight.

Re:Difference Between Childrens' and Adults' Versi

[Charcharodon]

adult version $20-40 hard cover/collectors edition kids version $7-15 soft cover/smaller format

that's the difference

I had a good spoiler, but kept it to myself...

[bigjarom]

I somehow 'found' a digital copy of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix a week before it was released. It seemed to be a scan-to-text of some sort of editor's copy. It had various notes and comments interjected here and there. I wish I still had it, but I eventually got the real book; and I often clean out my questionably legal digital content.

Re:Harry Potter and the Grammar Nazi?

[mrchaotica]

"Deathly" is a perfectly good word.

Are you sure you don't mean "cromulent?"

Sick of HP 'recommendations' on amazon?

[Zatic]

Try my userscript: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/7114

Makes Amazon useable again.

You didn't hear?

[jd]

On page 421, it is revealed that Salazaar Slytherin was actually a secret co-founder of Microsoft and contributed Clippy to Windows.

Be like David Eddings

[maroberts]

Produce another 10 volume epic simply by renaming the characters.

Re:Harry Potter and the Grammar Nazi?

[kripkenstein]

"Deathly" is a perfectly good word. It means "like or resembling death."

Indeed. A common phrase, probably familiar to most bookreaders, is "deathly pale".

Harry Potter: A New Hope

[maroberts]

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddently cried out and suddenly silenced as they started reading.

Cue Film at 11

[Wilson_6500]

It's going to be sad when we hear the first reports of college kids in "spoiler" t-shirts being torn limb from limb by hordes of enraged 12-year-old-girls' parents.

Potter Pool

[Wilson_6500]

I have to wonder how many office pools out there are taking bets: what page does Harry Potter die on?

who cares

[c6gunner]

I only got excited about this series when I heard a rumour that they were going to make a movie called "Harry Secrets and the Chamber Pot". Unfortunately it turns out that I was being had. Ever since, I've been pretty disillusioned about the whole thing.

Re:Harry Potter and the Grammar Nazi?

[sacrilicious]

"Deathly" is a perfectly good word. It means "like or resembling death."

Exactly. Another great one is "truthiness". Hoping to see "Harry Potter and the Undeniable Truthiness".

Re:'scifi'?

[polar red]

and if it has magic, elves and space ships in it ?

SPOILER

[csrster]

I have it on good authority that Dudley Dursley turns out to be the last horcrux. Harry cleverly kills Voldemort by stuffing Dudley down Voldermort's throat.

your confusing your movies and books

[Shivetya]

and your giving the LOTR people way too many ideas

Re:'scifi'?

[shadowmas]

Didn't somebody say "Science far enough advanced is indistinguishable from magic" or something like that ;)

Re:'scifi'?

[AeternitasXIII]

In library science, Fantasy is classed under sci-fi due to its explainations of the supernatural through magic and/or religious superstition. Speculative Fiction is seperated by its use of technology and science to explain seemingly supernatural circumstances.

Re:'scifi'?

[MindKata]

"SF has now been re-labeled as Speculative Fiction" ... "At least that's what my Literature professors at college claim"

Sounds like your Literature professors are living in some soft of Fantasy world. ;)

Re:'scifi'?

[Gabrill]

Still Fantasy. Sci-fi is the genre that imagines human progress, especially through technology. Anything that starts in another timeline that is obviously contradictory to our history, or anything from a completely fictional timeline such as another planet or reality, is fantasy.

Re:Sweeeet!

[mu22le]

On the other hand if you don't need a reference then you should definitely read this Little Gamers strip.

Re:'scifi'?

[cp.tar]

Oops... the text in the brackets was added as an afterthought... should've read it all afterwards...

ObOnionArchivePost

[Rogerborg]

Children, Creepy Middle-Aged Weirdos Swept Up In Harry Potter Craze.

I was hoping for a certain tag.

[Lethyos]

This should be filed under the “snapekillsdumbledore” category.

Your Dreams Were Your Ticket Out

[wiredog]

(Watches karma go down in flame. )

Re:Difference Between Childrens' and Adults' Versi

[Rick.C]

The obvious difference is in the cover, but if you look inside you'll find that the illustrations are less cartoonish and more... dignified, I guess. The text is the same, unless you compare the US vs. the UK versions. I haven't seen the Hindi, French, Spanish, etc. so who knows, maybe they have different text, too.

Re:Jo running amok recently?

[meringuoid]

What is she thinking, is she mightier than the child Jesus?

Yes, she is. Why else are all the Christians so scared of her books?

Re:'scifi'?

[franksands]

Yes, in The Books of Magic Ii believe.

Re:'scifi'?

[Chris whatever]

Actually no

Fiction can be attributed to any genre but if Science is involved in any way or theories, then you cant add Elves and orcs and magic wand, that is called Fantasy.

You could use the term Sci-fi fantasy genre, mixing all three together but in the case of Harry potter, there is no Science-fiction, even the flying car is propelled by Magic,

You

Re:'scifi'?

[franksands]

I am not a librarian, but I always thought like this:

• Fantasy is anything that has magic, elves and/or dragons, usually in a medieval setting, examples: LOTR, Discworld, Lodoss War, The Books of magic and obviously, Harry Potter
  
• Sci-fi is anything that has advanced technology, like robots, spaceships, nano-whatever thingies. examples: babylon 5, star trek, star wars, cowboy bebop.

If something has magic and technological thingies it still is Sci-fi, or "fantastic sci-fi".

Excerpt from page 608

[HeWhoMustNotBeNamed]

[Harry enters Godric Hallow where Lord Voldemort awaits and casts an unforgivable curse]
Voldemort: "Crucio"
Voldemort: "Good heavens ... are you still trying to win? You've got an overdeveloped sense of vengeance. It's going to get you into trouble someday."
[curse missed harry]
Harry: "My name is Harry Potter, you killed my, father prepare to die"
Voldemort: "Stop saying that"
Harry: "My name is Harry Potter, you killed my, father prepare to die. Avadacadavera"
[Voldemort dies]

Re:any hackers out there??

[orange]

we are so clever!

we already have copies of the manuscript in our clutches - but we only distribute them to registered users who know the secret handshake, and who have passed the secret initiation rite!

Re:'scifi'?

[egyptiankarim]

I'm not familiar with the books, but I have seen the movies (if that counts for anything), and it always felt that magic in world of Harry Potter was treated as a branch of science. The kids go to school for it, there's an experimental element to most of the things they learn, they seem to follow a "scientific" process in that they seem to make hypothesis and then test them, and the subjects have scienc-y sound names that end in -ology :) Perhaps the classification of Harry Potter as sci-fi has to do with the fact that they treat magic more as a science than a mystical force (???). I totally get the point you're trying to make, though, and it is valid. Personally, I more willing to call Harry Potter sci-fi than I am Star Wars (which I feel is actually closer to fantasy than anything else), but that's just IMHO.

Re:'scifi'?

[Gharbad]

Something is sci fi if the publishers/producters/network execs think it will sell more if it is categorized as sci fi.

Re:'scifi'?

[dargon]

uhmm, two words

Shadow + Run

Re:'scifi'?

[mikeisme77]

That is the current thinking in the English Literature Academia world, yes. Science Fiction/Sci Fi (Sci Fi is a sub-genre of science fiction--where science ficition contains real science and sci fi is for cheap thrills), fantasy, and horror (technically the proper labeling of horror is dark fantasy) all fall under the umbrella term "Speculative Fiction". This is due to the fact that they often have overlapping elements. For example, Star Wars has both science fiction (spaceships) and fantasy (the Force/magic) elements in it; Frankenstein has horror (scary monster) and science fiction (reanimating a corpse through electricity) elements to it, and so on and so forth.

So while it would be ok to label Harry Potter speculative fiction, it would not be okay to label him with the sub-genre label of sci fi (since there is neither fake nor real science in it)--Harry Potter is clearly made up of almost entirely fantasy elements (although at a stretch one might be able to say there are some dark fantasy/horror elements). One of my professors as an undergrad was the co-editor of Science Fiction magazine and I took his class on science fiction. I'm also friends with an English literature professor and have taken my fair share of literature classes (as required to graduate with a degree in creative writing).

Re:SPOILER

[rsadelle]

Yeah, right. He'd never fit!

Re:'scifi'?

[itlurksbeneath]

Yes. It's the third of Arthur C. Clarke's three laws of prediction.

Re:'scifi'?

[itlurksbeneath]

Amen, amen, amen. Most of the bookstores (Borders/B&N) label the section Science Fiction/Fantasy, which I don't have a problem with. To me, they are two very different genres of writing. One involves advanced or alternate SCIENCE, the other involves (usually) some sort of magical powers that are derived from the SUPERNATURAL. Armor by John Steakley is Sci-Fi. The Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan is Fantasy. I don't have a problem with both books being in the Science Fiction/Fantasy section, though.

Somebody should send a memo to the Sci-Fi channel, though. They need to add the "Fantasy" in there somewhere...

Bye, Bye Karma....

[josquint]

In many ways, anyone who attacks these books because they preach witchcraft etc COUGH*COUGH*CHURCH*TYPES*COUGH*COUGH are completely missing what these books have done.

I guess I would be one who fits in to the "Church Types" column, and I would have absolutly no problem letting my kids read them. I also own all the books and movies so far. I have heard objections from the more conservative of this column, and can see were they come from, but obviously have no exposure to the series.

Even children should have a distinction between Fiction and Non-fiction. That should be apparent in any childeren's novel. There are very few books out there that don't have something people will dismiss as 'not true' or 'not possible', but that doesn't mean we shouldn't read them and enjoy them!

You're creed is your business, and in everyday life anyone with any type of creed will have to make choices as to what they accept and regect. I very much enjoy a good fantasy, as do many, and see it as purley fiction without any bearing on my personal creed.

Besides, how many 'church types' lie^H^H^H tell their kid about Santa Clause!

Anyway, there goes my karma, and let the flamewar begin...

Re:'scifi'?

[spun]

I would say that anything where technology is used as a drop-in replacement for magic is fantasy. Science-fantasy, maybe. For instance, if people use blasters instead of wands of fireball, what's really the difference? Spaceships are just metal dragons. The force is just magic.

The effect of technology on humanity (or some human-like entity) is a major theme in real science-fiction. The science and technology don't even have to relate to our universe, but they do have to be internally consistent. Science isn't just thrown in as a special effect, it and it's impact on the characters and society must make sense. This is what makes science-fiction great, it helps us imagine the consequences of scientific development ahead of time.

Guns of the South?

[Valdrax]

Sci-fi is the genre that imagines human progress, especially through technology. Anything that starts in another timeline that is obviously contradictory to our history, or anything from a completely fictional timeline such as another planet or reality, is fantasy.

Interesting. Then what about Guns of the South, where South African apartheid supporters use a time machine to go back and supply the Confederacy with AK-47s during the Civil War?

It's contradictory to our history but still science fiction, in my opinion anyway.

Re:Guns of the South?

[Gabrill]

I've never read it, but that would still fit into my definition, even with the altered past. You see, time-travel science fiction still STARTS with our own unaltered history, and then proceeds to use technology to go wherever the plot takes it.

Re:Every day in the year has historical connot...

[SEMW]

You're absolutely correct; time heals all wounds. WWII was over 60 years ago. 7/7 was less than two years ago.

Besides, the main point wasn't that it wasn't a good day to release a novel in general -- considering how many novels are released every day, probably quite a few will be released on 7/7/07 -- but releasing a book that has terrorism and murder as key themes on a date specifically designed to draw attention to itself and the 7s in the date in order to attract publicity? Maybe not such a good idea, if only for PR reasons.

That's nothing. Check this out.

[Valdrax]

A little spoiler alert for the next book.

OT was Re:Gotta give her credit

[sgtrock]

I went on a C.S. Lewis kick about 25 years ago, so forgive me if my somewhat senile memory is misremembering things. :) I plowed through "The Screwtape Letters, then the Narnia books, then "Out of the Silent Planet", then I think Perelandra". I personally would have ranked the Narnia series first, "The Screwtape Letters" second, then "Out of the Silent Planet" and "Perelandra". IIRC it was "Perelandra" that put me off him.

I always intended to find the time to go back and re-read at least some of his stuff, but I've never gotten around to it. So MANY books, so little time. :(

So, umm...

[Valdrax]

How about the 5th of November, then?

Re:'scifi'?

[An ominous Cow art]

How do you know that the spells, wands, etc. in the Harry Potter world aren't simply examples of extremely advanced technology, indistinguishable from magic? :-)

Re:cut the adverbs out

[bennomatic]

I actually do drop some of the "he said, she said" stuff, since I actually read it in voices. My wife humors me and tells me that they're very good, but I think she's being generous. Luna is just Hermione a little deeper and slower, and Hermione is just Ron in drag, as voices go. Harry gets my voice, unaltered.

you should check craigslist

[uberjoe]

It's going to be hilarious when you're torn limb from limb by a horde of enraged 12 year old girls.

Hey man, not so fast. I bet there's people who would pay a lot of money to do that.

Re:'scifi'?

[Kemanorel]

Having submitted this same story, it is in the Sci-Fi sub-catagory simply because there is no Fantasy sub-catagory. It's a case of best fit in limited resources.

When all you have is a nail, the whole world looks like a hammer.

Boeing!

[PHAEDRU5]

The first copies to the US will arrive in a Boeing 777.

Re:not really

[Thraxen]

You could make the exact some observations with many, if not most, books. Every author has a style that could be picked apart. And most of your #2 points don'y even make sense. I grant you that the first one is something I though about too, but the next 3 either don't make sense or are meaningless. #3 isn't exactly correct in all the books, but it does serve as a general framework. But if you make an outline general enough it can apply to many books. Most books start out with some sort of initial event (the hook) and then climax at the end.

Re:Jo running amok recently?

[Thraxen]

I hope this is supposed to be a joke, because none of that makes any sense. Releasing the book around the same time of the movie can only help the movie, not hurt it. People will be excited about the new book, it'll be in the news, and the buzz will make people want to see the movie too. And how is the title in start contrast with previous titles? It's named exactly the same way (Harry Potter and the [X]). Who the hell cares when the name was announced?

How time works

[Ogive17]

11:59:59am
12:00:00 (noon, no am or pm designation for 1 second)
12:00:01pm

So, 12:01am would be 1 minute after midnight.

Re:Sweeeet!

[Ifni]

It's called foreplay. I recommend you look into it. :p

Oh no!

[Kamineko]

Snape... oh forget it.

Karma whores, kdes, and yu-gi-oh?

[tepples]

Fantasy as a genre is the one with trolls and gnomes and magic

Then what's the genre with karma whores instead of trolls, kdes instead of gnomes, and yu-gi-oh instead of magic?

Not...

[cjdkoh]

...7/7/07 then? That would have been cool. Well, as cool as a release date can be.

Re:'scifi'?

[Chris whatever]

Of course but they were talking about harry potter!